Science —

Online media and science make for awkward partners

The mainstream media used to be responsible for sharing science with the public, but scientists, their institutions, and the knowledge they produce now reach citizens via a myriad of social networking platforms and other tools. A video on nano quadrotors generates seven million views on YouTube, the keyword “science” produced two billion Google search results in 0.16 seconds, and the ScienceAlert Facebook page has three million “likes.” Welcome to the new age of science communication.

These new changes may significantly impact how the public understands science or perceives new scientific developments, according to a review of studies published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. The review, conducted by Dominique Brossard of the University of Wisconsin-Madison, examines recent major research findings related to science communication online and considers their implications for science in the 21st century.

According to the National Science Foundation’s biannual Science and Engineering Indicators report, by 2004, the Internet had become a significant resource for people searching for information about science, although television remained the dominant medium when it came to the overall time spent interacting with science content. That changed for the first time in 2012, when television and the Internet were described as "equally likely" to be the primary source of information about science and technology.

The 2012 report also challenged the view that individuals were simply using the Web versions of newspapers to get their information about science. Almost half of respondents relied on online sources rather than traditional ones: blogs, social networks, and Internet searches. Data suggests that scientists are also starting to rely on these alternative channels to stay up to date with developments in their fields. In 2010, one in five American neuroscientists reported using blogs to follow news about scientific issues, and one in four physicians used social media at least once daily to stay current on medical information and innovations.

Why are people going online? Surveys show they are looking up the meaning of a particular scientific term or concept, finding answers to a question they had about a scientific theory or concept, or learning more about a science story or scientific discovery they first heard about offline. Google data mining is aiding researchers who are looking at these motivations.

But there’s a dark side to using Google to seek out science content as well. Automated suggestions from Google influence the searches, driven by algorithms and audience metrics. Traffic, page ranks, and content we encounter can create what is known as a “self-reinforcing informational spiral.” A 2010 study in Materials Today analyzed the terms used most frequently to search for information related to nanotechnology, the search terms suggested by Google, and the nature of the content they retrieved. The study found discrepancies between what individuals searched for, what Google directed them to, and what content they were ultimately exposed to.

There are other worries beyond the fear that search engines can create an ever-shrinking selection of science news and information. A paper published by Brossard earlier this year found that social engagement with posts—what's said when sharing or commenting on articles—can shape readers’ opinions. A single story on nanotechnology would elicit different interpretations when paired with either civil or uncivil comments. Readers exposed to uncivil comments were more likely to attribute potential risks to nanotechnology and were more likely to see bias in the news story.

All of these changes mean that science communication is being redefined as the field evolves and embraces new media. But the field seems to be changing faster than the research is keeping up. There is research that examines general communication processes online, and it appears in specialized peer-reviewed journals such as the Journal of Computer Mediated Communication or New Media and Society. But very little of that research specifically focuses on online science communication.

“Science as an institution is, more than ever, in need of public support as federal funding is shrinking and scientific issues become more and more entangled with social and ethical considerations,” writes Brossard. If science wants to leverage the online revolution for successful public engagement, she says that advancing the science of online science communication should be a priority in order to understand the processes at play in online environments.

Ars Science Video >

Ars Visits a Lava Demonstration

Hot lava flows in a parking lot—in upstate NY

Allie Wilkinson
Allie is a freelance contributor to Ars Technica. She received a B.A. in Environmental Studies from Eckerd College and a Certificate in Conservation Biology from Columbia University's Earth Institute Center for Environmental Sustainability. Twitter@loveofscience